28 comments:

Bad stuff sneaks out of even the best places. When one of my customers was putting together a system for Buell, you'd be absolutely amazed at what went out the door as a finished bike. Don't get me started with Chrysler. So yeah, not at all surprising that the 2x4 folks would get a lemon, now and then.

Kraut machine tools have a tendency towards hubris. "That will NEVAH break!! and then of course it does, as is inevitable. And because everyone assumed it couldn't, no spares are available. In industry, the rule of thumb is, a german/austrian machine will run like dickens until it breaks, then you have the damnedest time getting parts, which are made of unobtanium, and carried across the himalayas by geriatric carrier pigeons with 3 pack a day habits.

I am kinda not suprorised to find that similar things are true of the firearms.

I didn't read all the comments there, but a couple of commenters made a good point - they shouldn't have changed the internals. I'm not a big fan of Glock (for ergonomic reasons, mainly), and I'm saying this as someone who has never fired one, but even I'll admit that they seemed to be rock-solid reliable before. There didn't seem to be any need for improvement internally.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. You change a highly functional system at your own peril, and it seems Glock is learning that the hard way.

This strikes me as the sort of testing that firearms, especially those designed for personal defense / law enforcement, OUGHT to get. I've b*tched for years about "reviews" that basically have the author get a single example of the arm, spend an afternoon running a few hundred rounds through it, then pronouncing it the shizzle or a dog.

From my limited understanding of the issue, wasn't the change to the internals motivated by a desire to have a single recoil spring assembly for both the .40 and 9mm versions? I've noticed that, of the Gen4 problems I've read about, they all seem to be 9mms.

Reason enough to renew my subscription to Gun Tests. I've shot and carried Glocks over the years (though NOT by choice), but can't imagine anybody who's serious about things (like, uh, life) EVER going directly from box-to-holster.Thankfully, my carry pieces are by MY choice now (though circumscribed by Federal fiat still).Even the piece you just test-fired before exiting the perimeter can fail; "One is none, two is one"

Generally speaking, in my experience, Glocks overall have been exceptional in terms of their reliability, but no one at Glock will even begin to discuss the .40 caliber Glocks the Indiana State Police got a few years ago.

"Gun Tests is one of those magazines that I like in concept, but I stopped reading some time back simply because... well, I wish their average writer knew as much about guns and how they work as ToddG."

This is, to the jot, my view of GT. I go back and forth letting my sub expire, then renewing it a couple years later, then letting it expire again.

They are honest and test interesting guns. I just ain't convinced they know their poop.

(However, I noticed that they have R.K. Campbell writing more stuff for them recently; that's a positive sign.)

I think the Glock Gen 4's are malfing due to the design being unproven. I think it has to do with the recoil springs, but it could be a number of things. I love Glock and I wouldn't give up my Gen 3's for the world. Glock better deal with this because S&W and Springfield have models that are as good if not better.

First class post and comment's all Tam. You hit the mark with the comment's pertaining to the Gen IV Glock's, my agency choose not to purchase them due to the increased cost. I see some being purchased later though for officer's with small hand's. Glock's are far from being the perfect handgun so many promote them as and are far from being as corrosion resistant as I've read. I know the weapon, train with it a lot and have confidence in my ability to use it, but I'll never hold it in the same regard of a well tuned Golt 1911 or Browning High Power.maryi

Tam, I'm relatively new to GT, literally just renewing my first subscription. I've found enough value in the tests - I've not based any purchase decisions on their work and don't agree with every consideration they list. I do like the fact that they will down-check something that doesn't work...

In my experience, Glock has a company culture built around saying nothing about their products. If you were having an outdoor meeting on a sunny day, it's doubtful you could get an employee to agree that the sky is blue, let alone acknowledge that there might be a possible problem with one of their models. One way information flow makes troubleshooting difficult at the factory.I wonder what the pre-employment process looks like at Glock? Probably modeled on the CIA, I'm guessing. 8)